Firing Jason Kidd may not be the last midseason shake-up the Milwaukee Bucks have in them. They continue to seek roster upgrades after plunging into fringe-playoff territory, according to Stein.

Orchestrating a conventional blockbuster is out of the question. The Bucks have long held DeAndre Jordan in high regard, but they're not prying him from the Clippers without surrendering some combination of Malcolm Brogdon, Thon Maker and Jabari Parker. And even if they can get away with sending out just one, they don't have the salary-matching tools to prevent Los Angeles from driving up the asking price.

Identical concerns and roadblocks will be part and parcel of any major move. Rounding out this year's depth chart while shaving off some long-term money is a more realistic goal.

Enes Kanter isn't the ideal acquisition at $20.6 million this year and $18.6 million in 2018-19, but he's piquing the attention of suitors surfing the market for size, per Begley. And the Bucks need size.

Milwaukee is 27th in rebounding rate; Kanter ranks fourth among all players in that department, just behind Jordan, Clint Capela and Drummond. He's shooting better than 50 percent on post-ups and a good-not-spectacular 58 percent out of the pick-and-roll. New York has shown he can be better than detrimental, if not close to average, guarding the basket when excused from multitasking.

Marco Belinelli's 37.6 percent clip from downtown is a no-brainer grab for an offense that needs to shoot more threes. Michael Beasley just plain gets buckets, at either the 3 or 4. Jarrett Jack is a must-have when giving up Brogdon.

Ah, yes, Brogdon. Last season's Rookie of the Year. Losing him hurts, but he's regressed as a one-on-one defender and is not worth making untouchable when the Bucks are jettisoning Matthew Dellavedova and Mirza Teletovic. Besides, Brogdon will need another contract after next season, at which time Parker will already be on his new deal and Eric Bledsoe is up for a raise.

Swallowing what's left of Teletovic's contract (expiring at $10.5 million next year) shouldn't scare off the Atlanta Hawks. They're basically in fire-sale mode, per Wojnarowski. The acquisition of D.J. Wilson and a second-rounder is adequate compensation for two players, in Belinelli and the expiring Ersan Ilyasova, who don't align with their big picture.

Accepting this deal should be similarly easy for the Knicks. Dellavedova's contract spans one year longer than Kanter's pact, but they trim more than $7 million off next season's payroll while opening the door for a super-intriguing backcourt alliance between Brogdon and Frank Ntilikina.

Golden State Warriors Receive: C Kyle O'Quinn

New York Knicks Receive: SG/SF Nick Young, 2018 first-round pick

Sources told ESPN.com's Ian Begley the Golden State Warriors are among the teams who have shown interest in Kyle O'Quinn. And with so many centers already in their employ, the New York Knicks should be open to a deal.

Breaking bread with the Warriors is, admittedly, more difficult than not. They shouldn't blink at giving up their first-round pick. They have a comfortable lead on the NBA's best record, so that selection will end up being No. 30—a borderline second-rounder.

Matching salaries (O'Quinn is making $4.1 million this season) is the headache.

Zaza Pachulia must give his consent in any trade, which he has zero incentive to do. Combining minimum-salaried players doesn't fly either. The Warriors need to send out three to make the money work. They don't have that many expendables, even at that afterthought cost, while the Knicks lack extra roster spots.

Forking over Nick Young won't sit well with Stephen Curry, Kevin Durant and Draymond Green; they all recruited him over the summer. But Swaggy P hasn't been great for the Warriors. Only Patrick McCaw has a lower net rating among teammates to appear in more than 10 games, and Young is averaging fewer points per catch-and-shoot possession than both Shaun Livingston and David West.

O'Quinn would help the Warriors. He has three-point range the Knicks don't utilize, is a reliable rim protector and owns a higher defensive rebounding rate than any of Golden State's players.

And don't underestimate the value of O'Quinn's Bird rights. The Warriors sure won't. They'll have the inside track on keeping him this summer (player option) or next, which allows them to navigate West's retirement and move on from a soon-to-be 34-year-old Pachulia without saddling Jordan Bell with overburdening expectations.

The KOQ deal is a no brainer if we are looking to move him. Get the late #1 for a guy who isnt in your future plans. The other deal sucks unless you covet Brogden which I dont. He's wonderful if you drafted him. Im not trading all those guys and taking fodder back just to get Brogden who I then have to resign to a longer deal.

EnySpree wrote:Beasley is untouchable this year. I want to be able to have him in the stable this summer.

def not untouchable... he's been good but he's still bad on D and a ball stopper. He's been a great pick up, but do we really see him here long term?

I think defensive players who are young and athletic are key. Sure, I hate to give up on Beas but Brogden is hard nosed two way and I could see he and Frank making life crazy for a lot of teams. Again as would be the case with KCP, depending on matchups THJr plays 2 or 3.

EnySpree wrote:Beasley is untouchable this year. I want to be able to have him in the stable this summer.

def not untouchable... he's been good but he's still bad on D and a ball stopper. He's been a great pick up, but do we really see him here long term?

Do we need him long term? He's 29... maybe 2 years team option for 3... not even for alot of money. KOQ/Baker money at 4 mill per year.

He's making so far below what he's giving us tat it makes no sense to trade him.

I'm hoping Beas appreciates his rejuvenation here and his current role and resigns on a team friendly deal.

Beas is different... he's not chasing money at this point of his career. He wants an opportunity. The market will determine the money. These gms are idiots though. Anything over 5 mill a year for Beas is over paying. He still has to show he's committed to being on a team. I love the guy more tan most but it is what it is.

EnySpree wrote:Beasley is untouchable this year. I want to be able to have him in the stable this summer.

def not untouchable... he's been good but he's still bad on D and a ball stopper. He's been a great pick up, but do we really see him here long term?

Do we need him long term? He's 29... maybe 2 years team option for 3... not even for alot of money. KOQ/Baker money at 4 mill per year.

He's making so far below what he's giving us tat it makes no sense to trade him.

I'm hoping Beas appreciates his rejuvenation here and his current role and resigns on a team friendly deal.

Beas is different... he's not chasing money at this point of his career. He wants an opportunity. The market will determine the money. These gms are idiots though. Anything over 5 mill a year for Beas is over paying. He still has to show he's committed to being on a team. I love the guy more tan most but it is what it is.

You just said he was untouchable but now he's not worth 5+ mil?? I'd trade him tomorrow for the right return.

If my hand is forced into moving O'Quinn, I want far more than a bad contract and an inconsequential pick. I wonder what the Nuggets would think about of a trade that allows them to unload Plumlee's larger contract and save $11 million long-term? They have the Jokic, Will Barton and Jamal Murry due for a major pay raise in the next season or two and I would have to imagine that they'd prefer the cap flexibility and improved play that O'Quinn would offer. They'd have to give up their pick and Juan Hernangomez for me to consider it.

I'd try to structure it all as a three-team deal since I wouldn't want Plumlee's money either. How about O'Quinn, McDermott snd Derrick Favors to the Nuggets; Juan Hernangomez and a $6 million trade exception to us; and Miles Plumlee, Malik Beasley, DENs 2018 1st round pick and $5 million cash (via NYK) to the Jazz?

NardDogNation wrote:If my hand is forced into moving O'Quinn, I want far more than a bad contract and an inconsequential pick.

Pretty sure Knicks wouldn't think of this trade as a bad contract and inconsequential pick. Are 1st rounders inconsequential? Maybe not for you but I'd guess most teams would like them for an expiring who is redundant and will probably price himself out of the team.

NardDogNation wrote:If my hand is forced into moving O'Quinn, I want far more than a bad contract and an inconsequential pick. I wonder what the Nuggets would think about of a trade that allows them to unload Plumlee's larger contract and save $11 million long-term? They have the Jokic, Will Barton and Jamal Murry due for a major pay raise in the next season or two and I would have to imagine that they'd prefer the cap flexibility and improved play that O'Quinn would offer. They'd have to give up their pick and Juan Hernangomez for me to consider it.

I'd try to structure it all as a three-team deal since I wouldn't want Plumlee's money either. How about O'Quinn, McDermott snd Derrick Favors to the Nuggets; Juan Hernangomez and a $6 million trade exception to us; and Miles Plumlee, Malik Beasley, DENs 2018 1st round pick and $5 million cash (via NYK) to the Jazz?

Would Utah be willing to forefeit cap space on a redundant talent though?

If something like this were possible, that $6 million trade exception could be very useful. I'd target someone like Jason Smith of the Wizards if their unprotected first round pick accompanied him. That $5.5 million worth of flexibility means a lot to them since they are set to pay the luxury tax but badly need to add salary to improve their bench.

NardDogNation wrote:If my hand is forced into moving O'Quinn, I want far more than a bad contract and an inconsequential pick.

Pretty sure Knicks wouldn't think of this trade as a bad contract and inconsequential pick. Are 1st rounders inconsequential? Maybe not for you but I'd guess most teams would like them for an expiring who is redundant and will probably price himself out of the team.

Why is Nick Young a bad contract? It's expiring.

I like this trade for both teams.

I thought Nick Young signed a two year deal with them. Him as an expirer makes the deal more palatable but I can't help but feel we need more than the 30th pick in the draft for a player with a 19.8 PER. If he became a Warrior tonight, he'd be 5th on the team in that regard without having benefited from the passing and floor spacing of Steph Curry, Kevin Durant, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green. I think that kind of talent requires more, especially when it comes with cost-control.